The comment by the leader of the antichoice group reveals their mentality. He is quoted as saying he can't understand why PP would want to protest itself. In other words, the only purpose he can understand for the demonstration later today is to be against PP and its mission. However, supporters of PP are testifying to the importance of reproductive choice, of family planning, of respect for the social contract in America in which differing moral and religious points of view can co-exist protected by the Constitution. He can't give credibility to a point of view other than his own. The anti-choicers won't get respect for their point of view from most of us until they show greater moral and intellectual maturity than is displayed in that leader's quoted remark.
Bill Stoesz Highland ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob Treumann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [StPaul] Mayor Kelly and City Attorney: Risking publicsafety atPlanned Parenthood protest? > > This is muddled thinking by Tester and the Mayor and the City attorney. > > Equal access for demonstrating does NOT require the two groups to occupy > the same > space. In this case, one side of the street is EXACTLY equivalent to the > other in terms of > accessiblity and visibility. > > Unless of course the goal of the Anti Choice people is to disrupt the > operation of the clinic by blocking access and intimidating > patrons. Much harder to do from across the street. > > If Planned parenthood had originally requested BOTH sides of the street. > Would fairness have been achieved by giving the Anti Choice people one side > of the street? > > Being a computer guy, I can't help but propose this algorithm for problems > like this. > > I'll use english language instead or computer code, but you'll get the idea: > > Begin > Group A gets a permit to occupy a space of X00 (x-hundred) square > feet for a demonstration > Government body approves request. > > Loop > 1 Desiring access to the same physical space, Group B requests half > of the space allocated to group A. > 2 Government Body grants Group B one half the space previously > granted to group A > 3 Justifiably desiring access to the same physical space granted > to Group B, > Group A requests half of it. > 4 Government body grants Half of group B's space to group A. > Continue Loop until the physical bodies of both groups are liquefied. > > End. > > Granting the same space to the opposing side had nothing to do with > fairness, and has > everything to do with harassing a planned parenthood and its patrons. > > If you want to know what the right wingers among us think of as equal access, > take a look at where they put potential protesters when President George > W(easel) Bush is in town. > > Bob Treumann > > > > > > > At 08:05 PM 3/24/2005, you wrote: > >Erin says: "Mayor Kelly and the City Attorney's office have done a > >tremendous disservice to good public policy, to free speech, to access to > >safe and legal reproductive health services, to public safety, and > >ultimately to the citizens of St. Paul." > > > >Bovine Scatology (as usual) > > From the Pioneer Press: "The anti-abortion group sought a permit for the > > same sidewalk space, arguing that federal law and court rulings gives > > protesters on opposing sides of an issue equal access to public space. > > Attorneys for the city agreed with Pro-Life Action Ministries. On Monday, > > the Police Department issued two new permits, effectively revoking the > > earlier document. One permit gives Planned Parenthood permission to > > demonstrate Friday on the western half of the sidewalk in front of the > > clinic. The other permit lets the abortion opponents gather on the > > eastern half. "The law requires that both parties have equal access," > > said Deputy Mayor Dennis Flaherty. > > > >"To put one side across the street, as was done last year, really does not > >comply with the law." > > > >Seems pretty even-handed to me. Maybe people should schedule their > >abortions on a day other than Good Friday. That might help. > > > > > >Dennis Tester > >Mac-Groveland > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- From: "erin stojan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[email protected]> > >Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2005 4:20 PM > >Subject: Re: [StPaul] Mayor Kelly and City Attorney: Risking public safety > >atPlanned Parenthood protest? > > > > > >> > >>No matter where you fall on the issue of abortion, the City > >>Attorney/Mayor's decision to force Planned Parenthood to share the > >>sidewalk Planned Parenthood had months ago via city permit with > >>anti-choice demonstrators is VERY disturbing. > >> > >>Don't get me wrong--I am completely in support of freedom of speech and > >>people registering dissent via demonstration, even when I (strongly) > >>disagree with what they say. However, demonstrations must be done in a > >>way that ensures the safety of all sides, and of the public; St. Paul > >>Police were prepared to set up both demonstrations to do just that, by > >>putting each demonstration on a different side of the street. We are > >>expected to believe that the Mayor and City Attorney's office suddenly > >>developed concerns, literally days before Planned Parenthood's pro-choice > >>demonstration (never mind that the permit had been filed months in > >>advance) that the city might be sued if anti-choice demonstrators are > >>relegated to the other side of the street as the Planned Parenthood clinic. > >> > >>This abrupt change of heart by the City allows Planned Parenthood only > >>days to put together the measures required to ensure the safety of staff, > >>patients and volunteers from up to 1,000 anti-choice protestors. > >>Anti-choice activists at the Highland Park Planned Parenthood have been > >>known to photograph clinic volunteers and patients, as well as their car > >>license plates, and post these pictures on anti-choice websites for > >>extreme anti-choice activists to target those individuals. > >> > >>If the Mayor or City Attorney truly had concerns about Planned > >>Parenthood's permit, it's tough to see why they did not make mention of > >>them until literally days before the event. Certainly this is not the > >>kind of action one would expect from an office that's supposed to be > >>concerned with maintaining public safety. > >> > >>The fact of the matter is that Planned Parenthood's permit for a > >>pro-choice demonstration on the sidewalk in front of its Highland clinic > >>did not need to be an issue. It's tough to see this as anything less > >>than a cynical attempt by Mayor Kelly to divide the City of St. Paul on > >>the issue of abortion on an election year, at the expense of the safety > >>of the public. Mayor Kelly and the City Attorney's office have done a > >>tremendous disservice to good public policy, to free speech, to access to > >>safe and legal reproductive health services, to public safety, and > >>ultimately to the citizens of St. Paul. For shame. We should be able to > >>expect better from our Mayor, his office, and the City Attorneys Office. > >> > >>Erin Stojan > >>Dayton's Bluff > >> > >> > >> > >>Jane Prince <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Today's Pioneer Press contains an article by Bob Ingrassia regarding the > >>annual Good Friday demonstration by the Pro-life Action Ministries in > >>Highland Park. For anyone who thought that a mayor doesn't have > >>anything to do with the abortion issue, think again. > >> > >>For tomorrow, Planned Parenthood applied for and was granted a parade > >>permit so it could control the activities immediately surrounding its > >>property, as it is legally entitled to do, on a day when as many as > >>1,000 protesters are expected to demonstrate at its Highland Park > >>clinic. Last year, St. Paul Police found this to be a good arrangement > >>for monitoring the safety of all involved. > >> > >>Acting unilaterally, without City Council concurrence or even > >>notification, Mayor Kelly's office and the City Attorney have > >>interpreted recent caselaw: 1) to force Planned Parenthood to share its > >>permit with Prolife Action Ministries on Good Friday; and 2) to > >>introduce amendments to city ordinances to conform to their > >>interpretation of caselaw. > >> > >>On Tuesday, the City Attorney led our office to believe that the > >>decision regarding the Good Friday demonstration was the result of a > >>court order. It was only when Jay and I read Ingrassia's article this > >>morning that we learned this decision was made entirely by the Mayor and > >>his City Attorney. > >> > >>That City Council offices and the public would be misled by our mayor > >>is bad enough, but that we can't rely on accurate information from the > >>City Attorney is a disgrace indeed. No matter which side of the > >>abortion issue you are on, this is NOT the way city government is > >>supposed to work. I urge anyone concerned about this to call Deputy > >>Mayor Dennis Flaherty, 266-8519, and City Attorney Manuel Cervantes, > >>266-8710. > >> > >>Jane Prince, Ward 4 Legislative Aide, 651/266-8641 > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>------------------------------------------------- > >>JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: > >>http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ > >>------------------------------------------------- > >>POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected] > >> > >>To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: > >>http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > >> > >>Archive Address: > >>http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>------------------------------------------ > >>Erin Stojan > >>Dayton's Bluff, Ward 7 > >> > >>--------------------------------- > >>Do you Yahoo!? > >>Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site! > >>------------------------------------------------- > >>JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: > >> http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ > >>------------------------------------------------- > >>POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected] > >> > >>To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: > >>http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > >> > >>Archive Address: > >> http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ > >> > >> > >>-- > >>No virus found in this incoming message. > >>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. > >>Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.8.1 - Release Date: 3/23/2005 > >> > > > >------------------------------------------------- > >JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: > > http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ > >------------------------------------------------- > >POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected] > >To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: > >http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > > > >Archive Address: > > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ > > ------------------------------------------------- > JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: > http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ > ------------------------------------------------- > POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected] > > To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul > > Archive Address: > http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/ > ------------------------------------------------- JOIN the St. Paul Issues Forum TODAY: http://www.e-democracy.org/stpaul/ ------------------------------------------------- POST MESSAGES HERE: [email protected] To subscribe, modify subscription, or get your password - visit: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/stpaul Archive Address: http://www.mnforum.org/mailman/private/stpaul/
